If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I believe the Pepacton and the Neversink is not capable of releasing that much water(FOR THE MONTAQUE TARGET) from there valves.Even if they where you would have flooding in some of the valleys on both rivers from the amount of water needed to keep the M. target at 1750 cfs.

You could spin the numbers like nyc does so often,however the bottom line is that they have been releasing 640 cfs as an avg for 40 years now.It demonstrates that there is enough water.

One more thing to throw into the soup,lets not forget PPL.Gotta run maybe someone else could fill in FF on the PPL issue.

FF funny how you BACKED away from your theory that the people in the small towns and the small money generated from these towns are so insignificant TO NYS?

FF,
You are wrong again with your numbers and for BS to think you are right, well thats wrong too.

If a release is at 600, never would the montague target be at 500. Are the fish putting the water in buckets?

Montague target at 170 has quite a few different resourses to pull from. PPL will be the big one. If you dont want to understand it now, watch the numbers as the summer progresses when PPPL starts dumping water.

there is more than enough water in the reservoirs, NYC can pull up to a certain amount every year and has never taken all they can. Habitat banjs etc. have been around for years, whether called habitat or not, they have not come close to being used.

Science and simple math with a little long division shows this. Dont take my word for it, check public records,

--FT
Nothing grows faster than a fish between the time the fish takes your fly...and the time he gets away.

You are the confused one. FF was not suggesting that Montague would be at 500. He was suggesting that if there was only natural flow, Montague would be at 500 and that we would need more releases.

I am willing to bet a substantial amount that you will not notice any difference because of PPL this year. We did notice any difference in the years that they ran the water that is proposed in the current scheme. You all make it sound like PPL has a new reservoir full of water they will be releasing. It is still the same amount of water they have always had.

You are still asking NYC to release more than they have to. Why would they do this?

Joe,

The East Branch has valve capacity to release about 700 cfs. This would not produce flooding. I do not know what the Neversink dam can release.

FT you are right; I exaggerated too much. Do you understand the concept though? Should we just ignore it because it does not fit the argument you are making?

What about the year that cannonsville went down to 3%? I'm not sure where that fits in to anyone's argument, but if that can happen without a 600 minimum release, might the probability rise of it happening again, with it? Oh, and by the way, why is nobody considering the trout fishery ABOVE the dam. I know that most of you do not partake, but there is a substantial population of Bruiser Browns in those reservoirs (You should see them when they spawn!) What levels of water in the reservoirs are you guys willing to fight for to protect them? Yeah, let's hear how they don't matter.

Joe, I'm pretty sure I never said that the 20 million mattered to NYS. If I did, point it out to me and let me see what my thinking was. Any amount of money makes a difference to a small town, absolutely. Indirectly(food, gas, etc.), the money helps to keep a few service jobs, but as has been stated, just 3 months or so of the year. I'm sure there are few, full time, 12 month positions being supported solely by fishermen. I don't know, but aside from lodging, what percent of those jobs directly paid for by fishermen such as guides, are held by full time residents? Where does that money ultimately go? Can they support themselves with three months of work? My point was only that people should not portray the money brought in as being the only game in town. One shouldn't try to convince everyone that the towns fold up without it. Those towns have been around much longer than the fishery has.

Now, how dare anyone portray me as not caring about the rivers and the fish in them. I enjoy them being there and want what ever is feasibly available for them. Excuse me for being so selfish as to have an open mind and consider the other side of the argument. It seems that there are people that don't take into consideration, ALL points of view. But only considering evidence that fits one's argument is shallow. It reeks of one just wanting to WIN. I want a solution that is right for all parties involved, not because I have an allegiance to one group or one outcome, but to the hope that the best resolution can be reached for all parties.
John

John
Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.--Henry David Thoreau

I didn't know Dennis well, but he gave me some great advice to fish high on the East Branch one time when the West was a shit show (like it usually gets in late spring). I had the best day I've ever...